|
Back to Environment
Homepage
15 April 2003
Crofters ignored
Ian Mitchell
Reproduced from the correspondence section of
The Scotsman, 15 April 2003
(Filed 15 April 2003)
www.land-care.org.uk
It is not every day that I find myself agreeing
with Stuart Housden, of the Royal Society for the Protection of
Birds. But I did when you quoted him as saying that Scottish Natural
Heritage can only be persuaded to act by "science" (in
your hedgehog cull article quoting me, 12 April).
My original point (Letters 11 April) was that
SNH ignores crofters and listens only to bodies like the RSPB. If,
as Mr Housden says, SNH only listens to "science", then
that, of course, excludes crofters. They do not have the resources
to undertake the sort of studies that the RSPB does. Therefore,
they are outside the circle of sources which SNH draws on before
taking action. As a rule, assertions by crofters are dismissed as
"anecdotal", in contrast to RSPB-type studies which are
"science".
This is highly discriminatory. In fact, many crofters
know far more about nature in the places where they live, including
things like hedgehogs, than some of the so-called scientists who
are parachuted in among them as researchers. Yet the locals are
almost never asked for their views. They represent the approach
of their communities. RSPB-type science represents the approach
of bureaucracy. They speak completely different languages; one regularly
misunderstands the other.
If "science" is the only permissible
language in which to address SNH, then the crofters are, ipso facto,
excluded, just as they were when monoglot Gaelic speakers were tried
in English-only courts. But environmental justice today is every
bit as important as criminal justice was 100 years ago. In both
situations, peripheral communities have been put at a disadvantage
by the centre. Mr Housden has, possibly unintentionally, made my
point for me.
IAN MITCHELL
Lennox Street
Port Ellen, Islay
|
